You are here
Home > Posts tagged "DPD"

Denver judge dismisses case against masked marcher who knew his rights

DENVER, COLORADO - US veteran cryptologist Jordan McDuffie was detained after last year's Million Mask March and charged with two counts, Obstruction and Pedestrian-in-the-roadway, for stepping unto Lincoln Avenue west of the capitol steps when DPD says the Anon- masked protester they believe to have been Jordan ought not have. Before his May 24 jury trial could begin and after offering increasingly favorable plea deals, the city motioned to dismiss the charges. Jordan, age 26, is a recently discharged vet. He was arrested at the march held every year in Denver on Guy Fawkes Day, Nov5. On November 5, 2016, after meandering about Denver's pedestrian mall, keeping to the sidewalk as small demonstrations are wont to do, about ten masked protesters stood on northbound Lincoln for less than a minute until cops arrived and the protesters left the street. One masked standee, not Jordan, was chased by officers up and down Capitol Hill but no contact or arrest was made. That marked the end of the otherwise uneventful, nonviolent 2016 march. An hour later, after a calm rally of speeches and singing, when everyone had left, Jordan and two vet friends were walking to their car and were jumped by Metro SWAT. Jordan and friends were pushed to the ground by approx twelve officers. One friend had his phone knocked out of his hands as he tried to video Jordan's arrest. Jordan cried out that the officers were injuring his war wound for which he was discharged but the brutalization continued. Two blocks away another participant, African American Kris Randolph, 32, was similarly arrested, in front of his mom. Both he and Jordan were jailed overnight. Without being told he didn't have to, Kris gave a videotaped interview while in detention. The two were released the next day on $100 PR bonds. Kris and Jordan were given Colorado state case numbers (16M10457 & 16M10458) which were transferred sixty days later to municipal cases (17GS000146 & 17GS000195), no reason given, except their 90-day speedy trial clocks started only thereafter. Both were assigned to Division 3H with Judge Kerri Lombardi. Kris, a roofer, father of four, with a minor criminal record, qualified for a public defender. Kris kept a number of court dates but eventually FTA'd at an April disposition hearing. Hopefully Kris can get back on track in view of how Jordan was able to resolve his case. Jordan represented himself Pro Se through several hearings. Right from the start Jordan submitted multiple motions, one asserting his First Amendment right to assemble in the street etc, another demanding expanded discovery to include the DPD “After Action Report” (AAR) for Nov 5, 2016. An AAR erroneously disclosed in a previous case revealed that 27 undercover officers had been deployed at the 73-attendee 2015 Million Mask March. Judge Lombardi did not agree with Jordan’s assertion that he didn’t need a permit to be in the street, but granted his discovery request. She commanded the city lawyers to inquire about an AAR. At a March hearing, prosecutors produced an

Denver cops kill hispanic teen Jessica Hernandez, seize the death video, gag public protest, and now pay her family a pittance because they’re immigrants.

DENVER, COLORADO- Not one Denver cop is going to jail for emptying their sidearm into a carload of teenagers, mostly girls, January 2015, killing just-turned-17 Jessie Hernandez, ON VIDEO, which officers confiscated from a witness. DPD was found to be lying about the joyride suspect aiming her car at officers, wounding one. She did not and the cop was not. The car only veered AFTER officers pumped 18 bullet into the driver as the four other teens screamed. DPD pulled Jessie's expiring body from the vehicle like a sack of potatos and handcuffed it. Now the City of Denver is settling the matter with Jessie's family for under a million dollars according to the local press, who've played no small role in covering up the missing video and blaming the victim by painting Jessie Hernandez as a petty-criminal, even though the "stolen car" belonged to a relative. As if auto theft calls for the death penalty. Because there's some question about immigration status in Jessie's Spanish-speaking family, lawyers and community leaders have quashed public outcry in the interest of working with Denver authorities, to exhonorate the police and minimize a wrongful death settlement.

As homeless defendants face camping charges, Denver courts lie to jurors.

DENVER, COLORADO- Trial began yesterday for three homeless activists charged with violating Denver's Unauthorized Camping Law. An ordinance enacted in 2012 partly as a coordinated response to Occupy Wall Street encampments across the country, partly to smooth the city's gentrification plans. Though six years old, the ordinance has escaped judicial scrutiny by DPD's careful avoidance of citing only homeless victims in no position to fight the charges in court. Deliberate civil disobedience attempts have been thwarted by the city bringing other charges in lieu of the "Urban Camping Ban" for which police threatened arrests. Thus Denver Homeless Out Loud's coup of at last dragging this sham into the Lindsey Flanigan Courthouse has generated plenty of interest. I counted four print reporters and three municipal court judges in the audience! From a jury pool of forty, city prosecutors were able to reject the many who stated outright they could not condemn the homeless defendants for the mere act of trying to survive. At one point the jury selection process was stymied for an hour trying to fill one remaining alternate seat because each successive candidate would not "check their social values at the door." One potential juror, a hairdresser, became alarmed that all the sympathetic candidates would be purged and so she refused to say how she felt about the homeless. She was removed and they were. As usual jurors were told it was not their place to decide against enforcing bad law. Only those who agreed were allowed to stay. And of course that's a lie. The only way bad laws are struck down, besides an act of congress, a please reflect how that near impossibility has spawned its own idiom, is when good jurors search their conscience and stand up for defendants. For those who might have wanted to get out of jury duty, it was an easy day. Show some humanity, provoke authentic laughter of agreement by declaring "Ain't no way I'm convicting people for camping." The jury pool heard that Denver's definition of camping is "to dwell in place with ANY FORM OF SHELTER" which could be a tent, sleeping bag, blanket, even newspaper. Several jury candidates stated they had relatives who were homeless. Another suggested it would be an injustice to press charges such as these. "So this isn't a case for you" the city lawyer asked. "This isn't a case for anyone" the prospective juror exclaimed, to a wave of enthusiam from the jury pool and audience. Another prospect said she didn't think this case should be prosecuted. The city attorney then asked, "so you couldn't be fair?" "I am being fair" she answered. All of these juror prospects were eliminated. What remained of the jury pool were citizens who swear to uphold whatever law, however vile. One juror that remained even said she gives the benefit of the doubt to police officers. Not removed. But there is hope because they couldn't remove everyone. Of the six that remain, one juror agreed to follow the law, even if it was a law

DIA issues protest permit under court order, but limits crowd size to, wait for it, FOUR! Then court stays injunction.

DENVER, COLORADO- Abiding by the injunction in McDonnell v Denver, DIA administrators granted us a free speech permit within 24-hours on Thursday, but they insisted that the terminal location desired could only accommodate FOUR PEOPLE. You heard right. Four. There's irony here too because there were FIVE people named on the permit application! Thus the permit was actually 20% denied, and in reality 92% denied given that we sought a permit for 50 people, a number easily lower than the DIA International Arrivals area can handle.   MEANWHILE, in the 10th Circuit Court, the city of Denver appealed the DIA injunction and asked for a stay. This is not usually granted in First Amendment cases, but on Thursday it was. The 10th Circuit stayed the injunction and wants to hear arguments on March 17. So at DIA for now we're back to the impermissive permit process that precludes accomodating public expression at the Denver airport. And the signing of President Trump's new improved Muslim Ban looms... THAT'S the more significant development in the case for free speech at DIA. But let's get back to our story, to how poorly DIA administrators complied during the small window when our court injunction was in force and DIA was enjoined to be accomodating to the public's right to expression. Getting the permit process started was not easy. There are instructions on the DIA website but no application. A call to DIA was routed to a person who insisted we read instructions online. We said we did. She replied that if we had, we'd know what to do. We reiterated that there was no application there, and that we needed an application. She took our names and vowed to have someone call us back. This was at 11:30am. After an hour we called back, explaining that time was of the essence, as was for them as well in responding to our request. We were given the same instruction, to consult the rules online. We explained that we'd READ the rules, STUDIED THEM in fact, and had them reviewed by a FEDERAL COURT. We exlained there was now a federal injunction to which DIA was bound and we required our permit request to be considered promptly, the first step of which, we presumed to be, the submission of an application! Our call was forwarded to a person who eventually emailed an application blank at approximately 4pm. We filed the application immediately and here's the correspondence that resulted: Mr. Dalton Please find attached a request for permit to protest at DIA at outside of international arrivals. We are requesting this in an expedited fashion  pursuant to judge Martinez's decision of a preliminary injunction re: Civil Action No 17-cv-0332-W JM-MJW. A new executive order is anticipated to be announced regarding the "Muslim ban" in the next day or two and we are requesting that the permit be processed within 24 hours to allow for a timely protest. We do not intend to obstruct airport operations. I will send you a copy

Colo. US District Court judge enjoins DIA to limit restriction of free speech (grants our preliminary injunction!)

DENVER, COLORADO- If your civil liberties have ever been violated by a cop, over your objections, only to have the officer say "See you in court", this victory is for YOU! On January 29 we were threatened with arrest for protesting the "Muslim Ban" at Denver International Airport. We argued that our conduct was protected speech and that they were violating our rights. They dismissed our complaints with, in essense: "That's for a court to decide." And today IT HAS! On Feb 15 we summoned the cops to federal court and this morning, Feb 22, US District Court Judge William Martinez granted our preliminary injunction, severely triming DIA's protest permit process. In a nutshell: no restrictions on signs, size of assemblies or their location within the main terminal (so long as the airport's function is not impeded). Permits are still required but with 24 hours advance notice, not seven days. Below is Judge Martinez' 46-page court order in full: Document 29 Filed 02/22/17 USDC Colorado IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge William J. Martínez Civil Action No. 17-cv-0332-WJM-MJW NAZLI MCDONNELL, and ERIC VERLO, Plaintiffs, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER,? DENVER POLICE COMMANDER ANTONIO LOPEZ, in his individual and official capacity, and? DENVER POLICE SERGEANT VIRGINIA QUIÑONES, in her individual and official capacity, Defendants. ________________________________________________________ ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION IN PART ________________________________________________________ Plaintiffs Nazli McDonnell (“McDonnell”) and Eric Verlo (“Verlo”) (together, “Plaintiffs”) sue the City and County of Denver (“Denver”), Denver Police Commander Antonio Lopez (“Lopez”) and Denver Police Sergeant Virginia Quiñones (“Quiñones”) (collectively, “Defendants”) for allegedly violating Plaintiffs’ First and Fourteenth Amendment rights when they prevented Plaintiffs from protesting without a permit in the Jeppesen Terminal at Denver International Airport (“Airport” or “Denver Airport”). (ECF No. 1.) Currently before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction, which seeks to enjoin Denver from enforcing some of its policies regarding demonstrations and protests at the Airport. (ECF No. 2.) This motion has been fully briefed (see ECF Nos. 2, 20, 21, 23) and the Court held an evidentiary hearing on February 15, 2017 (“Preliminary Injunction Hearing”). For the reasons explained below, Plaintiffs’ Motion is granted to the following limited extent: • Defendants must issue an expressive activity permit on twenty-four hours’ notice in circumstances where an applicant, in good faith, seeks a permit for the purpose of communicating topical ideas reasonably relevant to the purposes and mission of the Airport, the immediate importance of which could not have been foreseen seven days or more in advance of the commencement of the activity for which the permit is sought, or when circumstances beyond the control of the permit applicant prevented timely filing of the application; ? • Defendants must make all reasonable efforts to accommodate the applicant’s preferred demonstration location, whether inside or outside of the Jeppesen Terminal, so long as the location is a place where the unticketed public is normally allowed to be; ? • Defendants may not enforce Denver Airport Regulation 50.09’s prohibition against “picketing” (as that term is

DPD commander reveals arrest threat is a regular “ploy” to disperse protest

DENVER, COLORADO- We heard on Friday that US judge William Martinez needed more time to craft an opinion on a temporary injunction of DIA's enforcement of their free speech permit. He commited to a decision early this week, and frankly we don't know what to expect. From challenges he posed to attorneys at Wednesday's hearing, the judge appears to think DIA needs some degree of "notice" about potential disruptions. He is unlikely to rule against the permit altogether because he opened the hearing already proclaiming that DIA is a "not a public forum" and thus has discretion about what expression to allow. DIA can limit subject matter, but not viewpoint, and can constrict assemblies. Judge Martinez's starting point was based on US Supreme Court precedent set at JFK and Dulles airports, ignoring that both of those facilities are decentralized and lack DIA's literal public square. Ironically, neither JFK or Dulles attempted to quash their Muslim Ban protests as did DIA. I'd like to mention some other details revealed at the preliminary injunction hearing. For starters, the person in charge of approving permits has a highy subjective attitude about viewpoint. To him, pro-military messages are not oints of view at all, they're just patriotic. They don't require permits. Also, his department hasn't declined to issue permits. They work with applicants to arrive at accommodations suitable to the airport. For example, the American Islamic Society was recently granted a permit, the airport requires they limit their participant numbers to FOUR. DPD Commander Tony Lopez explained why he needs advance notice of protest actions, to be able to schedule officers without having to pay short-notice overtime. Lopez revealed that his optimal staffing numbers are a one to one ratio with activists. Small wonder he was demoted to DIA from downtown District Six. Lopez also testified that he often threatens to make arrests "as a ploy" to make a crowd disperse. And "it usually works" he said. A next step is to mobilize his officers to appear to be targeting particular activists, to increase the intimidation, without an actual intention of making arrests, or justifying them. His testimony confirmed what I described to the court, of officers often threatening to arrest us, even when they had no legal basis, and telling us we needed a permit when none was required. From the attitude of the city attorneys and the DIA personnel, one became uneasily aware that administrators don't even blink at sacrificing civil liberties for the interests of security. If airport surveillance can't size you up as either a traveller or meetor-greetor, they can't predict your behavior and you've suddenly become a security risk. Airport customs and TSA lines are already areas inhospitable to personal freedoms. Apparently airport managers would like all their hallways and public centers to be as restricted. If cops had their way, public streets and sidewalks would be single-purpose conduits as well. We await a federal judge's ruling for now, with optimism in judgement superior to that of petty administrators, city lawyers and

I’m told it’s a good day when you get to say “motherfucker” in federal court

The Colorado Springs Gazette was not amused. Nor was the Denverite about my testimony yesterday in US district court, seeking an injunction against the Denver International Airport's free speech permit. The city attorney tried to discredit me by forcing me to recite for the federal judge the full unabridge text of the sign I held at DIA. It was a riff on anti-Nazi cleric Martin Niemöller's oft-paraphrased parable: "First they came for the Socialists, but I said nothing, etc", this time foreshortened as a visceral response to Trump's Muslim Ban: "-and we said NOT TODAY [strong expletive]!" We argued about whether my message was "welcoming". I assured her that it was very warmly received and could not be interpreted as anything but uniquivocal solidarity. So I read it forcefully, resisting the inclination to lean into the microphone on the last word. Afterward my attorneys assured me it's a good day in their line of work when you get to say MOTHERFUCKER in court! Judge William Martinez restricted hearing testimony to the single day (Wednesday) and promised to rule on the preliminary injunction by Friday, February 17.

Denver jury trial for offense of leaving your homeless little dog off the leash

DENVER, COLORADO- Adrian "Munk" Brown faces trial on Monday, charged his dog being at large on the Lindsey Flanigan Courthouse Plaza. This happened on June 21 of last year, when he was testifying at the trial of a fellow activist. Because Munk wouldn't let the dog catcher seize his dog, he is charged with interference. Because more than a dozen officers responded to the scene, things escalated from there and Munk was taken to jail. But that's the pretext. In truth-- ADRIAN BROWN WAS TARGETTED, STALKED, TAUNTED & ARRESTED. 1. BRIEF STORY OF INCIDENT 2. PREDICTED SCHEDULE 3. CALL TO ACTION 4. LEGAL DISCLAIMER 1. WHAT HAPPENED? Ridding the streets of substantive evils, three animal control officers, a dozen courthouse deputies, and half dozen Denver police ultimately arrest Munk for not having an ID card and animal at large. Of course they added obstructing animal control and interference with police. Join me on the plaza tomorrow at 7am. My unleashed dog will be with me. Who else has a well behaved and appropriate in public canine buddy they can bring? Am I the only one who finds it somewhat Orwellian that Munk was arrested when SGT A. A. Martinez shows up and asks Munk if he will give him his ID. Then Munk asks him who he is. To which Martinez responds: he will take that as a refusal (to identify) and cuffs and stuffs him. COPS ARE REQUIRED TO PRODUCE THEIR NAME AND BADGE ID NUMBER TO THE PUBLIC UPON DEMAND. Members of the public, whom cops serve, are not required to carry papers or ID card with them. So the Master shall be criminalized for refusing to produce a non-existent ID to a servant upon demand, by a servant who refused to identify himself as required? Did I miss something here? SGT A. A. MARTINEZ IS A KNOWN DOMESTIC TERRORIST WHO HAS BEEN OBSERVED ACCOSTING A PREGNANT WOMAN FOR SIMPLY SITTING DOWN ON THE GROUND TO REST. (Yes, it is a crime in Denver to sit on the ground). DEPUTY FOOS is a known terror leader who commands a group of violent terrorists known as the FOOShiban. FOOS and his lawless thugs have harassed, detained, obstructed, pestered, and kidnapped Munk many times in the past - in fact, when a bystander observing this event speaks out and tells Foos he knows who Munk is and to share - HE DOES! He pulls out his little book, flips a few pages, and points to a place on the page to which the animal control officer responds by writing information on the citation clearly implying that Foos knows Adrian Brown well enough to have his identifying information at his finger tips. 2. PREDICTED SCHEDULE OF MONDAY EVENTS: Based on past trials, I predict the schedule will approximately be: Day 1 0700 - CHALK-A-THON 0730 - JUROR RIGHTS OUTREACH 0830 - DOCKET BEGINS 1030 - JURY SELECTION 1300 - POLICE TESTIMONY DAY 2 0900 - BYSTANDER TESTIMONY 1500 - JURY DELIBERATION 1530 - JURY VERDICT - NOT GUILTY 3. CALL TO ACTION I am advocating not only for you to join us in perfectly legal

Occupy v. Martinez (Plaza Protest Ban) 2016 US 10th Circuit Court of Appeals Decision AFFIRMING Prelim Injunction

Yesterday I published the federal judge's order to grant the 2015 preliminary injunction against the Lindsey Flanigan Courthouse. Since that time the city motioned to dismiss, there were show cause hearings, and depositions, and an appeal to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. On April 8, 2016 the appeals court AFFIRMED the preliminary injunction. As a result this legal action is on the road to becoming a permanent injunction, to be decided at trial this April. The prospects look promising, based on how the appelate judges schooled our First Amendment adversaries. I'm reprinting their full decision below. In particular you might enjoy Judge McHugh's citing of US Supreme Court Justice Owen Roberts, writing in 1939 for the majority, in a decision to uphold public first amendment rights in Hague v. [AFL-]CIO. Robert affirmed that streets were traditional free speech areas: "Wherever the title of streets and parks may rest, they have immemorially been held in trust for the use of the public and, time out of mind, have been used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions. Such use of the streets and public places has, from ancient times, been a part of the privileges, immunities, rights, and liberties of citizens. The privilege of a citizen of the United States to use the streets and parks for communication of views on national questions may be regulated in the interest of all; it is not absolute, but relative, and must be exercised in subordination to the general comfort and convenience, and in consonance with peace and good order; but it must not, in the guise of regulation, be abridged or denied." Here's the full 2016 opinion rejecting Denver's appeal of our federal injunction: Document: 01019599889 Date Filed: 04/08/2016 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT _________________________________ ERIC VERLO; JANET MATZEN; and FULLY INFORMED JURY ASSOCIATION, Plaintiffs - Appellees, v. THE HONORABLE MICHAEL MARTINEZ, in his official capacity as Chief Judge of the Second Judicial District, Defendant - Appellant, v. THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO, a municipality; ROBERT C. WHITE, in his official capacity as Denver Chief of Police, Defendants - Appellees. _______________ FILED ?United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit April 8, 2016 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court No. 15-1319 _________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado ?(D.C. No. 1:15-CV-01775-WJM-MJW) _________________________________ Stephanie Lindquist Scoville, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General for the State of Colorado, Denver, Colorado (Cynthia H. Coffman, Attorney General; Frederick R. Yarger, Solicitor General; Matthew D. Grove, Assistant Solicitor General; Ralph L. Carr, Colorado Judicial Center, Denver, Colorado, with her on the briefs) for Defendant - Appellant. David A. Lane, Killmer, Lane & Newman, LLP, Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiffs - Appellees. Wendy J. Shea, Assistant City Attorney; Geoffrey C. Klingsporn, Assistant City Attorney; Evan P. Lee, Assistant City Attorney; Cristina Peña Helm,

Pro-immigrant activists with Occupy Denver file suit against DIA and DPD, challenge airport free speech “permit”

DENVER, COLORADO- Civil liberties champion David Lane has filed a complaint in US district court challenging Denver's office of the city attorney for instituting a permit process at DIA to prevent public protest. Holding signs has become impermissible at the airport, without the issuance of a permit seven days in advnace, although police are not bothering themselves about signs welcoming homecomers or seeking to connect business visitors with their limo service. That selective enforcement is unconstitutional of course, and the lawfirm powerhouse of Kilmer Lane & Newman is filing suit on behalf of two Occupy Denver plaintiffs. last Sunday, January 29, both were threatened with arrest by DIA police. While two earlier attempts to assemble had capitulated to DPD intimidation, the Occupy Denver activists stood their ground. Why did you file your lawsuit? "We know our rights. We want the POLICE to know our rights." 1. Full text of complaint: Case 1:17-cv-00332 Document 1 Filed 02/06/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 14 Civil Action No. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO NAZLI MCDONNELL, ERIC VERLO, Plaintiffs, vs. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER,? DENVER POLICE COMMANDER ANTONIO LOPEZ, in his individual and official capacity, DENVER POLICE SERGEANT VIRGINIA QUINONES, in her individual and official capacity, Defendants. ______________________________________________________________________________ COMPLAINT ______________________________________________________________________________ Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys David A. Lane and Andy McNulty of KILLMER, LANE & NEWMAN, LLP, allege as follows: INTRODUCTION 1. Plaintiffs Eric Verlo and Nazli McDonnell challenge a regulation of alarming breadth that bans all First Amendment expression at Denver International Airport without a permit. 2. Plaintiffs are concerned citizens who believe that President Donald Trump has overstepped his executive authority by signing the January 27, 2017, Executive Order (hereinafter “Muslim Ban”), which permanently bans Syrian refugees from emigrating to the United States, temporarily bans nationals of seven countries (including permanent legal residents and visa-holders), and suspends all applications to the United States refugee program (even as to vetted entrants currently in transit). 3. Plaintiffs wish to express their disgust with President Trump’s (likely unconstitutional) Muslim Ban. They wish to do so in the same place that hundreds of thousands of Americans across the country have done: standing directly outside of the secure Customs and Border Protection (hereinafter “CBP”) screening area within an airport where immigrants to America enter into the main terminal after clearing customs. Plaintiffs, unlike many citizens across this great nation who have exercised their opposition to the Muslim Ban in airports by chanting, singing, dancing, and praying, simply wish to stand in silent protest, holding signs that express their solidarity with immigrants and the Muslim community. 4. Plaintiffs are banned from doing so by DENVER INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT REGULATION 50 (hereinafter “Regulation 50”). 5. Regulation 50 states: “No person or organization shall leaflet, conduct surveys, display signs, gather signatures, solicit funds, or engage in other speech related activity at Denver International Airport for religious, charitable, or political purposes, or in connection with a labor dispute, except pursuant to, and in compliance with, a permit

How I nearly got arrested for holding a sign at Denver International Airport

DIA, COLORADO- Last weekend I joined thousands across the country protesting Trump's executive order restricting entry visas from seven predominantly Muslim countries. Spontaneous demonstrations had erupted at international airports nationwide on Saturday January 27. Denver's airport was no exception but the lively gathering of sign holders was ultimately persuaded by police to leave the premises. Supposedly a permit was required to hold signs. Demonstrators the next day were quickly ushered outside, to rally instead between the terminal and adjacent lightrail station, where only a tiny fraction of travelers would see them. This much we knew as we monitored events online while we reconnoitered DIA from the short-term parking garage. We made our way swiftly to the International Arrivals doors at the north end of the main terminal WITH OUR SIGNS. International Arrivals The point was to reach immigrants, right? We walked to our intended protest spot unhindered and inconspicuous, because of course signs are not an unusual sight at an airport. Travelers who've been a long time away, in particular soldiers returning from deployment, are frequently greeted by family members holding signs. Often limo drivers have to page their corporate clients. We carried our placards with their message facing inward hoping they'd be mistaken for everyday signs. When we raised them above our heads we attracted immediate attention. They read "#NO MUSLIM BAN #NO REGISTRY, END WHITE PATRIARCHY" and "FIRST THEY CAME FOR THE MUSLIMS AND WE SAID: NOT TODAY MOTHERFUCKER." Immediately a man with a "DIA Operations" cap informed us that we weren't allowed to hold signs. We assured him the opposite was true. He called for backup. We weren't alone in front of International Arrivals. In addition to the families awaiting loved ones, there were a couple dozen law firm employees holding signs which read "Pro Bono Immigration Legal Services". We surmised that their presence might have already been negotiated with DIA. Soon a couple of those lawyers approached us to announce loudly that the public protest was outside the building and that we could continue there unmolested. We thanked them for their assistance but urged that they also clarify publicly that we were within our rights to stay inside as well. I was upset that their gravitas, as lawyers, was seen as supportive of the authorities telling us to stop. Police officers arrived in short order, a first one filming us with a digital point-and-shoot, then a second filming with a cell phone, both surely streaming to a command center. After six officers assembled, a sergeant approached us flanked by two DIA employees. She gave us our formal warnings. We were given instructions to "cease and desist" while we countered that we knew our rights. After a second warning we were assured that a third would mean our immediate arrest. We held our signs higher, all the while asserting their order was unlawful. The immigration lawyers huddled as far away from us as they could. Sgt. Virginia Quinones then got on her phone to consult somebody. I

Unresolved 2015 protest case reveals Denver police have been concealing evidence from all activist trials

DENVER, COLORADO- A seemingly ordinary protester-in-the-roadway case has exploded in the face of Denver city lawyers from the prosecutor’s office to the department of civil liabilities. The case against activist Eric Brandt, for chasing a police motorcade which had falsely arrested a fellow demonstrator, today revealed that in arrests made at political protests, Denver police have been withholding key reports from the evidence disclosed to those defendants. Denver police file what’s called an “After Action Report” for public protests that prompt a mobilized law enforcement response. But the department doesn’t release the report to arrestees who face charges stemming from those actions. Ostensibly the reports are kept secret to avoid public scrutiny of crowd control strategies, but the reports also document the attendance of officers who witness the purported crimes. Those --otherwise undocumented-- personnel write reports which are then not included in the discovery evidence. That is what defense lawyers call “Brady Material”, witnesses who are not consulted about what they saw, possibly exculpatory evidence which is being denied to the accused. What role those officers might play in the circumstances leading to the arrests is also kept a mystery. Last week just before Eric Brandt’s trial, a DPD After Action Report for the protest arrests of August 28, 2015 was accidentally brought to the court’s attention the morning of trial. DPD Commander Tony Lopez brought the AAR report with him as a crib sheet to help his officers corroborate their witness testimonies. The prosecuting attorney coaching the witnesses was offered the report as an aid and as a consequence she was obligated to reveal it to the defense. At first Judge Frederick Rogers gave the defense one hour to study the new document. An hour later, after everyone had pondered the implications, the jury pool was excused for good and Rogers conceded that more time was needed for further subpoenas. At a pretrial conference today Judge Rogers tried to limit the extent of additional evidence needed before the case could proceed. He rejected a subpoena which he deemed too broad, and limited requests for further AARs to those filed August 26 and 28th. While a prosecuting attorney described such reports as so rare she’s never encountered one before, another city attorney sheepishly admitted that a paralegal in his office had unearthed three AARs that may meet the criteria. So much for rare, that’s three in as many days. Another city attorney insisted that she needed to vet those beforehand, but a peeved Judge Rogers volunteered to assess their applicability himself. If they weren’t in his in-box by 4pm, he’d assume they were forwarded to the defense as ordered. In question in this particular case was a mention that the head of Denver’s Dept of Public Works had ordered the police action on August 28. This is at odds with all previous police testimony which denied communication with Public Works. It goes toward impeachment of those officers as well as establishing whether Denver police have been abusing the city’s “encumbrance” ordinance. The encumbrance

UPDATE: Deaf blind judge gives Shadoe Garner 75 DAYS JAIL for possession of Wicca ritual athame and for littering.

DENVER, COLORADO- Shadoe Garner was found guilty today by a judge who didn’t blink at the public defender having no time to prepare, at discovery evidence not being provided to defense, at prosecutors withholding half their witnesses and videos (depriving the defense of knowing what might have be exculpable evidence), at being forwarned that a 35C Appeal was virtually guaranteed, and despite two police videos making very clear that Shadoe’s rights were violated, if only the judge had ears and eyes to see it. The courtroom staff should have seen trouble brewing earlier in the morning when an attorney announced “the court will call Emanuel Wilson” and the old judge replied “I’m sorry, did you say Javier Lopez?” Uh, no. Judge Frederick Rogers is a dead ringer for filmmaker John Huston, with none of the latter’s sense of humor. He tried a case before Shadoe’s, a young black vet with PTSD who was awarded a large settlement for a traumatic brain injury and who went off on his lawyers for witholding the award in a conservatorship. The judge found him guilty of making threats, however exaggerated, giving no allowances for his mental disability. In Shadow’s case, Judge Rogers denied all motions to wave speedy trial, and declared he wouldn’t suppress the prosecution’s evidence based on the defense not having seen it. The judge wanted to see it presented first so he could assess its worth to the charges before considering suppression. Essentially, motion quashed. The evidence wound up supporting Shadoe’s claims, that he identified himself, that he had served papers on Commander Tony Lopez, not littered, and that the “weapon” he carried was a religious talisman, if also a knife. “My name is Shadoe Garner” Three times on the video Shadoe Garner told officers his name when asked, both first name and last. He even provided his date of birth. From that the officers could have run a check on his identity without having to take him into custody for not having an ID. The officers even testified that they heard Shadoe say all that. But the judge only heard the defendant say “Shadows” and so felt the defendant was being evasive. Officers can even be heard on the video using Shadoe’s name as they talked to him! Instead of cross-checking his info in their system, the officers took Shadoe from the crowd and that operation required a pat down. Before doing that, Officer Montathong asked Shadoe, “do you have a weapon or anything that could poke me?” Weapon vs. Athame “Yes” Shadoe replied, I have an Athame” and he gestured to his left thigh. The officers retrieved what they alerted each other was a knife. Shadow countered “It’s not a knife, it’s an athame, a ceremonial object.” He repeated that explanation several times on the video. It might be relevant to point out that Shadoe was wearing his robe, a distinct purple garment which officers would recognize over and over on the 16th Street Mall or at Stoner Hill, where the Dirty Kids live. Shadow thinks of

Mistakenly released DPD After Action Report reveals 27 officers on “shadow operations” at Denver 100 Mask March

DENVER, COLORADO- Hidden deep in the evidence against one of nine protesters arrested at last year's Guy Fawkes' Day march in Denver, was an "AFTER ACTION REPORT" never encountered before in discovery evidence available to previous Denver activism defendants. This report has provided the first public mention of "Shadow Teams" deployed on "Shadow Operations" against peaceful demonstrators. Most remarkable was that 27 officers were mobilized for shadow operations, among a total of 169, clocking a total of 1379 man hours, against a rally and march that numbered "around 100" at its peak, to quote the report. The report was presented to Denver municipal judge Beth Faragher on Monday before the trial of one of the Anonymous arrestees. The judge was asked why discovery evidence didn't include reports from the "Shadow Teams" detailing, for example, what their shadow operations were. Judge Faragher agreed to continue the trial until September to allow city attorneys to come up with some answers. One defendant's lawyer was also provided the Denver Police Department's Crowd Management Manual, an earlier edition of which was leaked last year by Denver's Unicorn Riot. The current manual does not differ on this subject and defines Shadow Team as: "A team of officers assigned to identify Persons of Interest as being involved in possible criminal activity based on Reasonable Suspicion.” There is no disagreement that shadow operations involve undercover officers following targeted activists. The question is what were they doing to maintain their cover? You can't surveil moving marches from under storefront awnings or hotel windows. To mingle with protesters who have to march with them. To ingratiate yourself with hosts you have to participate. To impress leaders you have to delegate. So what actions were the shadow offices mimicking? The title "Million Mask March" means to aggregate all the actions across the world demonstrating on Guy Fawkes' Day, every 5th of November. Individual marches are ridiculed for being mere fractions of a million, in Denver for example, marshalling only a hundred or so. Now, even more humiliating for Denver may be the revelation that up to a quarter of the marchers were undercover cops. Denver activists are accustomed to infiltrators, such have been photographed and outed regularly, but 27 officers operating in "shadow teams" is news. It may rewrite the last several years of arrest incidents. Arrests of Denver protesters have appeared sporatic and haphazard. Now it seems the targeting may have been restricted to actual protesters, because their shadow companions were not arrestible, by virtue of being cops. Although Shadow Teams are mentioned in the DPD manual, this After Action Report is the first to itemize their deployment. Here's the command structure which list the names of three officers whom lawyers may be able to depose: a Commander Fountain, Lieutenant Mitchell, and Lieutenant Jimenez. Defense lawyers are now considering deposing these officers to learn more about what their operations entail. Unfortunately the narrative provided in the 4-page after action report does not detail the "shadow" activity. It does however mention the number

Third Guy Fawkes Day case dismissed as Denver continues to arrest marchers

DENVER, COLO.- Last night Denver police mobbed a demonstration protesting the officer-involved execution of unarmed suspect Dion Avila Damon in front of his wife and child. At the end of Tuesday's march, Robin Hamm and Nathan Stickel were arrested for obstruction, failure to obey, and destruction of private property. They were still in custody when fellow activist, Joaquin dela Torre-McNeil, arrested at an identically uneventful march last November, showed up for his court date today only to hear the city motion to dismiss his case. Joaquin was charged with interference and resisting arrest, both accusations without merit. This morning the city admitted as much. This marks the third of nine arrests made November 5, 2015 which have been dismissed. Peter Lewis, 31, was snagged as an obstructee, then detained on a possessions charge until all charges were dropped November 20. Brandon Deaton, 24, was charged with obstruction. He was represented by attorney Frank Ingham and his case was dismissed March 23. Joaquin's dismissal bodes well for the remaining six cases, which are equally unfounded. Four are charged with interference and obstruction, plus the odd sundry misdemeanor: David Croisant, 29, is represented by attorney Birk Baumgardner; Selayna Bechtold, 19, is represented by Venkatesh Iyer; Mark Iannicelli, 58, is represented by Katayoun Donnelly; and Justin Berding, 25, is represented by Cheri Deatsch. Two are charged with felonies: Damian Stasek, 25, represented by attorney Lon Heymann; and Jake Pauly, 25. Both are charged with assault of a peace officer, which happens whenever physical contact is not initiated by the police, although in both cases this was a technicality. Bumping into police officers is going to happen if they get in your way, especially when they have no right to get in your way, given that your first amendment right was the reason they were supposed to stay out of your way. If there's no obstruction, there's no interference, and your collision with their obstruction of your civil liberties is not assault. The November 5th march was uneventful except for the arrests. There was neither property damaged, traffic impeded, nor lives endangered. The police acted purely to intimidate and squelch protest. They succeeded but now the courts are not supporting their actions. As charges fall, the accusations lose veracity. Certainly the crowd's anger at their demonstration being curtailed with such heavy-handedness is being shown to having been legitimate. You can't arrest people for objecting to your unlawful conduct. But DPD hasn't been taught that lesson yet. Last night's march for DPD victim Dion Avila Damon was equally harmless. Arrests were made for the usual show of force. Two activists remain in custody. The bureaucratic delay is now excused as a 24-hour processing requirement for fingerprints to clear the system. Only then will bonds be calculated and allowed to be posted. Detainees will then wait a minimum of five further hours to be released. When last night's charges are dismissed, Denver will have to account for two more wrongful imprisonment cases.

Denver Homeless Out Loudest Ray Lyall

Here's a better picture of Denver Homeless Out Loud activist Ray Lyall and colleague, with the usual Denver protest entourage. Ray Lyall was found guilty of trespass last week, like his cohort DJ Razee before him. The two were among nine DHOL members arrested defending Tiny Houses on October 25, ten if you include a follow-up action, but Ray and DJ are the only cases to come to trial. Four more are scheduled soon: April 20, May 9 & 10, and June 1. You might well ask, what of the remaining four? They PLED GUILTY. It is customary not to condemn another's self-preservation needs, but let's be honest, taking the plea deal does hurt everybody. Pleading guilty implicates your co-defendants, validates the police probable cause, and sacrifices the opportunity for which arrest and detainment were the ante. Ray Lyall took his case to trial, compelled five police officers and a Denver Housing Authority to take the stand, opportuned an eloquent lawyer to speak about homelessness and the bigger picture, tied up a municipal courtroom profit center for two days, and was sentenced to peanuts: one year probation plus community service. Probation is essentially what's been on offer for plea deals, so Ray risked only being found not guilty. DJ's sentence admittedly was not peanuts, it included jail time. The judge declared she would rather have imposed probation, but DJ knew probation would hinder his options as a street activist. DJ stipulated jail so that afterward he'd be free to protest without the spector of a deferred sentence weighing upon him. Plea deals have shaped a lamentable pattern for Denver activists. Owing to inadequate legal representation or financial hardship, many political arrestees have been tempted by offers of deferred prosecution or deferred sentencing which have necessitated their abstention from further protest. Some who have continued to participate in demonstrations have been in the awkward position of encouraging others to do what they could no longer risk, perpetuating the cycle of arrests and plea deal emasculation. The Denver activist community has some serial plea dealers, who always take pleas and ensnare newbies with them every cycle. As a result, fresh activists become burned out and regular police oppression is emboldened. The irony of course is that the vast majority of Denver protest arrests have been violations of civil liberties. It will only stop when the police are challenged and sued. Obstruction, interference, failure to obey, resisting, trespass, disturbing the peace etc, are the habitual pretexts which Denver police have been using to curb street protest. Even the felony charge of assault of a police officer has been succesfully used to scare activists into taking pleas. Usually such "assaults" were simply collisions or confrontations where police officers were the actual assailants. Not everyone is in a position to fight their charges to the bitter end, but asserting the illegitimacy of political arrests is critical to bringing Denver police to heel. If you are going to plead guilty because you don't think you have the right to march in the

Denver art student informs Tale of Two Hoodies with Goya’s Third of May 1808. This KKK cop executes the black child.

DENVER, COLORADO- Here's what the Denver Post article didn't explain about the Denver high school art student who was pressured to remove her controversial piece from public display. Where was it being shown? At the Wellington Webb Building. That's not irrelevant because it's where viewers became offended. You could go inquire about the incident, if you knew where to ask, or where to protest the work's removal. The WELLINGTON WEBB BUILDING downtown on Colfax. What's so controversial, the scene is real isn't it? There's more. The student's drawing is essentially a reproduction of Michael D'Antuono's 2014 piece "A Tale of Two Hoodies" which still sparks outrage. Missing in this version is the bag of Skittles which the black child offers the cop, locking the two figures in a standoff. Or obviously a mugging. The Skittles of course recalls Trayvon Martin and we know how that ended. The hands in the air references "Hands Up Don't Shoot" and Michael Brown who shared the same fate. All else about the Denver student's contextualization of D'Antuono's work is the same, the confederate flag uncovered from beneath the wallpaper of Old Glory. In the student's piece the American flag appears worn through. In D'Ontuono's original the racist flag has bursted through. The cop and hood are the same, except in the original the cop was maybe more fat. What's also missing in the DenPo whitewash is the context of the unamed student's assignment. She was tasked with contextualizing TWO works. The influence of the second piece is not as apparent as the first. The boy's hands-up wasn't merely recalling the mantra of the Black Lives Matter movement, it was evoking the student's other chosen influence, Goya's famous "The Third of May 1808." In that iconic work, a firing squad is executing a rebel with outstretched arms. KNOWING THIS, you can see the student's policeman has drawn his gun for an EXECUTION, not an arrest. The boy is not following an order or raising his hands in surrender. If even in resignation, this boy's upheld arms communicate a plea. How does that inform you about this young Denver student's understanding of "Hands Up Don't Shoot" or "I Can't Breathe"? The officer's Klan hood certifies that this shooting is a lynching. Many lynchings in the traditional sense were perpetrated by deputized citizens. Denver Chief of Police Robert White said of the student's work: "I'm greatly concerned about how this painting portrays the police." Well sure, and Chief White didn't know the half of it. Should you go complain at the Wellington Webb Building? The Denpo article mentions Chief White intends to "have a conversation with the student and her parents." You may want to caution that the Office of the Independent Monitor be invited attend that conversation, as a ride-along so to speak, to assure it isn't the one-sided transaction to which we are becoming accostomed and inured. Does Chief White think that racially enhanced officer involved extrajudicial executions should not be a student's concern? He needs to look

Denver courthouse arrest violated both Chief Justice Order and CJO injunction!

DENVER, COLORADO- The good news is that Denver has dropped the recent charges against Mark Iannicelli for disturbing the peace and violating a court order. The even better news is that the city had to release the probable cause statement which warranted Mark's arrest. It turns out Mark was arrested for "distributing literature which is a prohibited activity on any walkway to the Courthouse." Further, "The court order was posted at all public entrances to the Lindsey-Flanigan Courthouse which was where the incident took place." While order CJO-15-1 is indeed posted at the door, it doesn't ban the distribution of literature. Beside which, there's a federal injunction stopping Denver from continuing to make these arrests. True, the city's appeal is on appeal, but the injunction stands. Hold on to your hat because there's a fair amount of attention being paid to this matter, helicopter fly-bys and all. Failure to know the law, or as they say, not getting the memo, is no excuse, as we all know, especially for cops.

Monk Brown set up a tent on the plaza. It took a SWAT team to take it down. Now a Denver jury took them down.

DENVER, COLORADO- Homeless Adrian "Monk" Brown was accused of "obstruction" for sitting in a protest tent last August 26th on the plaza of the Lindsey Flanigan Courthouse. Monk was also charged with "interference" with the riot police sent to evict him. A subsequent charge of "failure to obey" was added by prosecutors pressuring Monk to take a plea. After a two day trial which ended Wednesday, a Denver County jury found Monk Brown NOT GUILTY of either obstruction or failure to obey. Owing maybe to a crime scene video that highlighted the brutal irreverance shown by protesters toward DPD officers, the jury did convict Monk of interference. Except now it wasn't a crime scene. Monk's attorney Melissa Trollinger Annis is challenging the inconsistent verdict because it's unlikely interference will stick without the police having a cause for arrest. Monk wasn't obstructing. This verdict marks the second time Monk has beaten the obstruction charge. The first was November 17 when Monk was acquitted of erecting a tent in the plaza on August 28, two days after the recent case. Monk put up that tent the moment he got out of jail for his August 26 arrest. He was fully acquitted in that case. Monk's subsequent arrests in the plaza on September 18 and September 24 were dismissed and dropped, respectively. Monk's arrests numbered among the 19 arrests and two citations issued against the plaza demonstrators during a full time Occupy Denver protest which ran from August 26 to October 21, 2015, when DPD effected a final eviction and activist resources became terminally waterlogged. Just as the activists have now become tied up in court, Denver police headquarters are now overburdened with a hoard of tents, tarps, chairs, umbrellas, banners, and drums which must be kept in evidence. The plaza protest was launched after the arrest of Mark Iannicelli and Eric Brandt for distributing jury nullification fliers at the Lindsey Flanigan Courthouse. Activists with Occupy Denver won a federal court injunction to prevent such further arrests. With an ongoing legal battle stipulating the plaza as not just a traditional free speech zone, but a designated free speech zone, the city's backdoor methods of restricting First Amendment Rights could be isolated and exposed. For too long, the city of Denver has been able to curb free speech through backdoor charges: Obstruction, disturbing the peace, jaywalking, and TRESPASS. Activists are even charged with resisting arrest, when subjects are actively objecting to their unlawful arrest. The days of halting political demonstrations by having riot cops enforce city ordinances such as obstruction may be drawing to a close.

HEADS UP: DPD courtroom leak reveals Denver homeless sweep to start at 1pm

DENVER, COLORADO- City attorneys asked county court Judge Espinoza for a continuance today because their key witness was preoccupied with a "city wide operation" which they conceded was the well publicized homeless sweep which local media teams and Denver homeless have been anticipating all morning. It turns out Commander Lopez might have trouble reaching the witness stand because he's set to begin the confiscation of homeless possessions around the Samaritan House at 1PM. So that's news for everyone. Please spread the word. Trial attendees are planning to spend their lunch break augmenting activist numbers at Park Avenue and Lawrence.

Occupy Denver’s new one finger salute

HILARIOUS! Thanks to "What Happened in Bailey", as FBI agents have put it, Occupy Denver has a new gesture with which to salute police when their cruisers make frequent passes during OD actions. Instead of raising the middle finger, high and defiant, to flip off the cops --NOW what's done is to POINT your index finger, thumb upward, and PUMP, tracking the officers as they pass! DPD had become nonchalant about being disrespected, responding to the bird with "have a nice day". They don't know what to do when protesters mock their deaths under the gunsight of home defender Martin Wirth. As they say: Live by the disproportionate use of force, die by disproportionate use of force.

Motion hearing for 4/29 protest arrest brings out affinity of cops and judges.

DENVER, COLORADO- A local activist flipped off a municipal court judge. Yes, it's not done, but the consequence was more severe than even the judge intended. She was attending a motions hearing of a fellow protester accused of disobeying a cop. During DPD testimony an officer was narrating a surveillance video which the audience was unabe to see. She tried to shift seats but was told to sit down. After two admonishments, she complied in silence but made a disrespectful gesture where she sat behind the flat screen monitor, where she thought the judge wouldn't see. But a clerk did see the gesture and told the judge. Judge Nicole Rodarte, no friend of political activists and facing a roomful of them, immediately had her held in contempt of court for the remainder of the hearing. Contrary to instructions, the unnamed activist was taken across to the jail to serve a sentence of ten days. We're not sure yet who was complicit with the mixup. Here's what happened: It was a hearing no Denver street activist wanted to miss. Habitual free-speech offender Jesse Benn is accused of disobeying a lawful order, being on the street, failure to disperse, etc, etc, at the April 29 march solidarity march for the people of Baltimore upset about the in-custody murder of Freddy Gray. Jesse's jury trial will follow shortly. At this motions hearing, the unpopular motorcycle cop Michael Rispoli was testifying as to the evidence against Jesse. Officer Rispoli is uniformly reviled for his tendency to ram his motorcycle into peaceful marchers. At the April 29 march, Rispoli dropped his motorcycle, feigning having been pushed by bicyclist Michael Moore. A SWAT crew piled on Moore, protesters rushed to his defense, this precipitated more arrests and prompted the police to pepperspray the crowd which included a number of small children. Justified by the attack on Officer Rispoli. Jesse Benn recorded the video which proved Rispoli's lie. All charges were dropped against Moore, but the rest of the arrestees are being prosecuted, including Benn. Rispoli by the way has been reassigned to DIA. After six years on the downtown motorcycle crew, monitoring and herding political demonstrations, he's been demoted to the airport. So at this hearing Bad Cop Rispoli was proudly testifying about the crowd-control techniques of the motorcycle unit. Very, very informative. At one point the prosecution played a police surveilance video so that Rispoli could give the play by play, point out offenders, and share his strategy. Except the audience couldn't see the video screen. The content wasn't forbidden, the judge just saw no need to make a screen available to the public. This being a public hearing. It was frustrating, and said audience member rose to move about to catch a glimpse of the video. Judge Rodarte told her to sit down. She explained the problem, the judge only repeated her warning. She returned to her seat and apparently formed a finger with her left hand, thrown down behind the large screen monitor, where

Denver jury finds camp protester NOT GUILTY of tent erection (obstruction).

DENVER, COLORADO- Andrian "Monk" Brown was observed on HALO camera "erecting a tent" on the spot he'd been arrested two days before inside a similar tent. He was arrested escaping the scene of the crime and or walking his dog around the block. This week Monk was tried for obstruction, the deputy city attorney prosecuted the case herself but was unable to overcome the jury's inclinations that the charges were "silly". Monk's defense attorney rested her case without presenting a thing. Essentially the closing argument was this: did a three-man tent obstruct anyone in a large public plaza? NOT GUILTY. The jury had many questions of their own for the prosecution's witness, District Two Commander Anthony Lopez. The judge allowed none of them. One of the questions asked "what was written on the tent?" In fact the tent was decorated with many slogans and constitued part of the political protest in front of Denver's municipal courthouse. The protest had been going for three days, twentyfour-seven. The protesters had won a federal injunction preventing the city from arresting them for the pretext of "jury tampering". The protest was pushing up against the "urban camping ban" ordinance although the city refused to cite that infraction, instead confiscating the "encumbrances" of activists and charging them with obstruction. Many "evictions" later, several activists are now burdened with cases of "obstruction" and Monk's verdict offers hope that Denver juries will see through the city's pretext. An important lesson learned during Monk's trial was the opportunity offered by the police arrest video. While issues of "jury nullification" or the camping ban or the right to assemble or the police state would be impossible to sneak past a city attorney's objections, talking about them calmly over a megaphone during the police raid will give the jury a full uninterrupted twenty minutes of background context with which to reveal what "encumbrance" the city is really worried about.

Denver cops using urban camping ban to harass protest on free speech plaza

DENVER, COLORADO- During their nightly raids of the protest encampment at the Lindsey Flanigan Courthouse, technically Tully Plaza, Denver police are citing the city's "Urban Camping Ban" to rouse the activist and force them to collect their belongings in semblance of "moving along". Plaza arrests have reached fourteen but have been for obstructing passageways with "encumbrances" because Denver has been avoiding bringing the camping ban charge down on anyone with the legal means to contest it. Denver is circumventing a federal injunction which protects the Occupy Denver activists from arrest for distributing "Jury Nullification" fliers in front of the courthouse, by finding the protest activities to violate other ordinances. Activists have relied on the injunction to protect all speech, thinking that the original injunction would be unconstitutional if it presumed to dictate the content allowed. The city's latest ploy was not unexpected and shines a light on the selective enforcement of laws designed to oppress those inhabitants stuck on the streets, who don't have an activist's prerogative to move along.

To the Denver Better Business Bureau: Complaint about DPD Moving & Storage

Dear sir, We are writing to you as a last resort to recover our lost property or to receive compensation. On Sept. 18th of this year we contacted Toni Lopez ( Head Mover) with the DPD Moving & Storage Co. As you can see clearly in the attached video, when the DPD Moving & Storage showed up at our home, there were many more movers than were needed for the task at hand. It's true they were all dressed in company uniform, but it seemed they were a little over-armed for the occasion. Toni Lopez handed my husband the contract for his signature, my husband refused to sign until Lopez gave a cost estimate for the extra help. At that time my husband was overpowered by the movers demanding payment, he was place in one of the moving vans and taken to their office for further negotiations. They are now demanding one thousand dollars before my husband's release from their office. As you can see in the video, many of the movers at our home preformed no task and should not be paid. They left our home with trash scattered everywhere and now claim they have lost all our possessions. Any help you can give in this matter will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Freda Farkel

Top